netdev - Re: [PATCH 01/10] netfilter: x_tables: Merge xt_DSCP.h to xt

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <128620a6-a02e-db25-dd69-4ebee326d15c@blackhole.kfki.hu>
Date: Thu, 9 Jan 2025 15:59:59 +0100 (CET)
From: Jozsef Kadlecsik <kadlec@...ckhole.kfki.hu>
To: Szőke Benjamin <egyszeregy@...email.hu>
cc: Jozsef Kadlecsik <kadlec@...filter.org>, Florian Westphal <fw@...len.de>, 
    Pablo Neira Ayuso <pablo@...filter.org>, lorenzo@...nel.org, 
    daniel@...earbox.net, leitao@...ian.org, amiculas@...co.com, 
    David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>, dsahern@...nel.org, 
    edumazet@...gle.com, kuba@...nel.org, pabeni@...hat.com, horms@...nel.org, 
    netfilter-devel@...r.kernel.org, coreteam@...filter.org, 
    linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, netdev@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 01/10] netfilter: x_tables: Merge xt_DSCP.h to
 xt_dscp.h

On Wed, 8 Jan 2025, Szőke Benjamin wrote:

> 2025. 01. 08. 21:11 keltezéssel, Jozsef Kadlecsik írta:
>> On Tue, 7 Jan 2025, Szőke Benjamin wrote:
>> 
>>> 2025. 01. 07. 20:23 keltezéssel, Jozsef Kadlecsik írta:
>>>> On Tue, 7 Jan 2025, egyszeregy@...email.hu wrote:
>>>> 
>>>>> From: Benjamin Szőke <egyszeregy@...email.hu>
>>>>> 
>>>>> Merge xt_DSCP.h to xt_dscp.h header file.
>>>> 
>>>> I think it'd be better worded as "Merge xt_DSCP.h into the xt_dscp.h
>>>> header file." (and in the other patches as well).
>>> 
>>> There will be no any new patchset refactoring anymore just of some
>>> cosmetics change. If you like to change it, feel free to modify it in my
>>> pacthfiles before the final merging. You can do it as a maintainer.
>> 
>> We don't modify accepted patches. It rarely happens when time presses and
>> even in that case it is discussed publicly: "sorry, no time to wait for
>> *you* to respin your patch, so I'm going to fix this part, OK?"
>> 
>> But there's no time constrain here. So it'd be strange at the minimum if
>> your submitted patches were modified by a maintainer at merging.
>> 
>> Believe it or not, I'm just trying to help to get your patches into the
>> best shape.
>
> Holyday session is end, i have no time to refactoring and regenerate my 
> patchset in every day, because you have a new idea about cosmetics 
> changes in every next days. (this is why asked you before what you like 
> to get, there was no any answer) If you feel it is need, you can solve 
> it as a maintainer, i know. If you found any critical issue i can fix it 
> later, please start to look for them, but i will not waste my time with 
> this usless commit name and header comment changes, sorry. It is a 
> hobby, i am not a paied Linux developer which is supported by a company 
> for this stuff.

Your patches do not fix any bug in the code itself. The unified 
match/target modules would be a good to have for less memory usage but 
it's not pressing either.

So there's no time pressure at all, if you wish/need you can continue to 
improve your patchset when you'll have the time.

Best regards,
Jozsef

Ps: I have been doing my Linux developing/maintenance in my spare time.